Why is the Kenda BlueGroove 2.35 so popular on the Turner forum ?!

Hi,

I am currently researching for new tires for the spring/summer for my 5spot, something with a little more grip than my Continental Gravity 2.3 tires (which I understand are the same size as Nevegal 2.1 tires...) that will give me more confidence in turns and small drops, not too heavy and slow, for terrain anywhere between soft and hard pack.

In looking at various threads in the Turner forum, it appears that the Kenda BlueGroove 2.35 is VERY VERY popular as a front tire - more so than the nevegal for all-around riding, even though according to the Kenda site it is hardpack tire...

Any special reasons for this popularity of the 2.35 Blue groove?
Any good suggestions otherwise?

The BG knobs really aren't any shorter than the Neve's, but they are more widely spaced, so I think they lend themselves to soft conditions more than the Neves. I have ridden a 2.5 BG as a front tire and liked it a lot, but tore a lot of knobs off (or at least turned them into flappers) on slickrock. I ride a Neve 2.35 in front often and like it too for all-around riding. It makes a lousy rear tire though. I don't know why Kenda classifies their tires the way they do.

You will note that tires are heavily subject to fashion trends. For a while it was all Conti, then all Schwalbe, then all Kenda.... Anyway, we are on the backside of the Kenda curve right now.

I've experimented with the BG and Neve in the front and for so cal conditions I prefer the BG. It just seems to wander less in loose rocky conditions and inspires more confidence. That's just my opinion, I'm sure there are many others who prefer the Neve in front.....but I stick with the Neve as a rear tire on all of my bikes.

I dunno. I love the Nevegals. I have them on both of my FS rigs. Stick-E compound. I've used both XC and DH casing versions. I've used the 2.35, the 2.5 and the 2.7 and all of them are excellent tires for my local terrain.

I've heard that some like the Blue Grooves too though.:

Originally Posted by tscheezy

Anyway, we are on the backside of the Kenda curve right now.

speak for yourself, gear-swapping maniac. I'm still on the front side, haven't hit the apex.

I just got a set of Nevegel DTC 2.35s and a set of the Schwalbe Nobby Nics 2.25s from Larry.

I ran my first combination of the Nevegel front and the NN rear today. The NN didn't do as well in the mud as the Nevegel but was far from bad. Both did really well over the damp roots and rocks. They both seemed to roll faster than my winter tires, Geax Blades 2.25 front (more like a 2.4) and a 2.1 rear.

I love the blue groove as a front tire and don't mind it all as a rear tire. I have several sizes of the BG and Nev, including UST, DTC and sticky versions. So far this "spring," I'm running a UST 2.1 Hutch Spider in the rear and the 2.25 DTC BG in the front on my flux -- that's keeping me happy so far. I have a lot of other tires (Mich, Conti) that I don't use.

I want to check out the Nobby Nic sometime soon.

I exclusively ran Fire XC pros for years and it is only the last couple of years that I somehow decided to be a tire geek. For whatever reason I've liked some of the Kenda tires better than others I tried.

I can't afford to keep up with the guys on this forum as far as gear changes go, but the 2.3 BG front and the 2.3 Nev. on the rear has worked well here on the East Coast in MA. So well in fact that I'm ready to change out my Nev rear for a new one but the BG has worn just enough to make the rolling resistance that much better. its gonna be a great riding season.
M.

I found the perfect tire for where you ride

Tald, ive been using Bontrager Big Earl 2.5 front, and Earl 2.4 rear and i find them to be perferct for our part of the world (our world = 20 rocky, square km between meirav and carmel ). Big volume, great traction, low rolling resistance for their size, and-unlike some reports on kedas-very tough and long lasting. I run them with ghetto tubless at 35 psi and love them.
the only minus is you have to watch out for the fashion police
PSI

Thanks all for the replies.
Actually, after failing to find nevegal 2.35 tires anywhere here (all sold out), and being a little worried about its short life and tendency to sheer rubber, I decided to continue with a fresh set of Continental Gravity 2.35 tires.
The experience with them during the last year was really great, so there is a very good chance others will not be better.
For anyone interested, here is a summary of 10 months on them:
- REALLY long lasting - still ridable after 10 months with a lot of rocky terrain riding.
- Strong sidewalls (I am using the 'protection' version).
- Started out slow rolling but really improved after around a month's usage.
- Great grip on rocks.
- Good but not great on very loose terrain.

By the way, here is a invaluable web site I stumbled upon that really eased the size comparison between all these tires (Kendas are usually large for their printed size, Continentals and Maxxises are small... - but where and when and by how much..) http://www.mtbtires.com

PSI, I may definately give your suggestion a try next time!! Definately the same 20 square km...

Conti tires are pinner compared to Kenda Nevegals, so don't go thinking it can't get any better after those tiny little roadie tires that Conti sells as MTB tires.

but seriously, I've used the Continental Vertical Pro 2.3 a fair amount and it makes me think two things: (1) Continental 2.3 tires are really about 2.1 or 2.0 sized; and (2) the Vertical Pro was the best of all the 2.3 "DH" tires Conti made/makes, and it's nowhere near as grippy or cushy or dependable as the Nevegal 2.35 Stick-E or DTC compounds (XC casing).

never have I heard anyone [including myself] grouse about Geax Sturdy's......pretty much a bomb proof, lightweight, easy rolling, grippy on everything do it all tire.....very confidence inspiring handling and grip. Sure, I live in michigan where we don't really have big time rocks, but we get our fair share of scratchy terrain. And, I rode them out at Northstar last summer and liked them just as much....but beware - the 2.25 version is positively huge!

I didn't like the Nev

First I tried one in the rear. For soft conditions it's rolling resistance was huge. I had to work twice as hard with this tire. Anything wet and off camber was out of the question with this tire on the rear. Also I found the large knobs weren't very good on wet roots or wet rock.

Once I put the tire in the front it was ok, but I still wasn't crazy about it. I would use 2.1 high rollers any day of over the Nev.

I have heard lots of people that don't like the Nev like the BG. Apparently since the knobs aren't as big, they grip wet rock and roots better. I'm going to be picking up some BG soon.

1. Does anyone else here have experience with both the Kendas and Contis and can compare? I have heard great things so fat about the Verticals. Are they really that inferior?

I ran Vert Pros and Explorers (2.1 version of the Vert Pro) for years. They roll well and seem to wear pretty well, but in the conditions I ride in now they just don't work for me. I lived in Oklahoma where the terrain is not steep and rolling at best, and the Contis worked great in that type of terrain.

Here in CO, the terrain is steep, hard and often loose and I find myself spinning the Contis on technical climbs a lot. Maybe I lack the finesse I need, but with the Nevegals I never spin them, they just stick.

The Contis are certainly undersized for their claimed sizes. The 2.1 Nevegal has a broader footprint than the 2.3 Vert Pro. I bought a Vert Pro a couple months back to use up some Team Performance points before my membership expired. Removed the 1/2 worn Nevegal I had on previously, put on the Vert Pro and went for a ride. About 3 miles into the ride I had decided I was done with the Vert Pros in these conditions.

I think under the right conditions and style they are decent tires, but for the steep and loose hard pack stuff I ride now I find the Nevegal to be the best tire I've tried thus far.

I have been running the Nevy 2.5's up front, and 2.35s on the rear for a year. I finally found the perfect tire for hard pack rocky terrain. And for cornering grip, these tires blow everything else out of the water. I recently tried a Geax Sturdy, but hated the cornering habits. But as stated above, the nevy's don't roll well at all, especially in the sticky version, but I'm not trying to win any XC events.

El C,
You try the Bettys yet? I think they outperform the Nevs in cornering. I don't love the Nev as front tire. I find that Nev has a very dramatic give-way under hard cornering which I don't like. The transition onto those side knobs can be dramatic. Blue Groove has a more controlled transition and I think the Big Betty is better than either Kenda.

That was very Gonzoesque. Have another beer Reny. After all, it is Monday morning.

Funny you should say that Squeak. I was reading several threads this morning before I posted that, and I saw several posts by Gonzo where he was being a nice, regular guy. I must have felt that the universe needed to balance that somehow, my fingers typed a response that came from some other astral plane.
Really. It's not that I haven't had a beer yet. In a couple hours mabey, but I'm good to go now.

I have heard lots of people that don't like the Nev like the BG. Apparently since the knobs aren't as big, they grip wet rock and roots better. I'm going to be picking up some BG soon.

who are these people?

I rode slippery rocks, ruts, roots last summer and fall on Nevegals and they were the best tire I've used in those conditions. rode them on the North Shore in snotty slickness and they grabbed everywhere, surprised me silly.

I can't say that the traction improvement was all due to my own phenomenal bike handling skills. some of the credit goes to the Nevegals.

Funny you should say that Squeak. I was reading several threads this morning before I posted that, and I saw several posts by Gonzo where he was being a nice, regular guy. I must have felt that the universe needed to balance that somehow, my fingers typed a response that came from some other astral plane.
Really. It's not that I haven't had a beer yet. In a couple hours mabey, but I'm good to go now.

I'm not sure I can ever be a Renegade, but I'd encourage you to get more gonzo in your posts, seeing that I'm not playing that role any more.

El C,
You try the Bettys yet? I think they outperform the Nevs in cornering. I don't love the Nev as front tire. I find that Nev has a very dramatic give-way under hard cornering which I don't like. The transition onto those side knobs can be dramatic. Blue Groove has a more controlled transition and I think the Big Betty is better than either Kenda.

Hey Gonz,
Saw your post on the SuperShape. Picked up a set of Ripstick from Dawg which are great. Sound exactly like your description of the SS which I expect I'd like.

HELL YEAH! nice move!

those SuperShape are RAD, man. I'm sure the Ripstick feels likewise, Dawg knows his stuff and said the 2 are pretty similar skis. the SS makes icy runs fun again. but alas, my season is done. I'm in bike mode now. I even set aside the idea of a trip to AltaBird & Soli for spring dee-lish. too much bike on the mind.

El C,
You try the Bettys yet? I think they outperform the Nevs in cornering. I don't love the Nev as front tire. I find that Nev has a very dramatic give-way under hard cornering which I don't like. The transition onto those side knobs can be dramatic. Blue Groove has a more controlled transition and I think the Big Betty is better than either Kenda.

Betty's are on the way to me and CrashtheDog from Larry. Should be here today. I'm gonna have to disagree about the Nevy's. I prefer it to the BG for the front, because it has a very predictable drift when cornering hard. I'm looking forward to trying out the Betty.

Betty's are on the way to me and CrashtheDog from Larry. Should be here today. I'm gonna have to disagree about the Nevy's. I prefer it to the BG for the front, because it has a very predictable drift when cornering hard. I'm looking forward to trying out the Betty.

I definitely agree with you on this. One of the Nevs best traits is that it breaks away predictably and is easy to control once it does.

I rode slippery rocks, ruts, roots last summer and fall on Nevegals and they were the best tire I've used in those conditions. rode them on the North Shore in snotty slickness and they grabbed everywhere, surprised me silly.

I can't say that the traction improvement was all due to my own phenomenal bike handling skills. some of the credit goes to the Nevegals.

To each there own I suppose. There is a trail network near my work, which I ride at least three times a week after work. When my rear 2.1 sticky high roller became too worn I tried a 1.95 sticky Nev. The 1.95 Nev is actually larger than the 2.1 high roller. Anyway these trails are very technical, they are similar to the shore, except without the stunts.

It's easy to blame a bad ride or two on new equipment so I kept the Nev for a few weeks before I decided I didn't like it.

Whenever it was wet, the tire would feel like it was full of cement. This tire rolls really poorly in soft wet conditions. The tire seemed to hook up on wet root and rock, but as soon as the wet rock/roots were slightly off camber the tire would always slide out.

Lots of very strong riders who ride the same trails I do swear by the BG. People who have ridden both say the BG has lower rolling resistance and they didn't seem to slide out on the same off camber terrain I found problematic on the Nev. Keep in mind, this off camber wasn’t an issue with the high rollers.

Regardless of my experience, the Nev seems to be a good tire. Just not suited for the conditions here in the fall.

I recently switched to a 2.1 DTC Nev in the back and a 2.1 Stick-E BG up front. They both weighed in at between 610 to 615 grams. I've only put one ride on them so far and haven't made up my mind on them yet. At 110 grams more, I was too much of a pansy to try the 2.35 Stick-E BG.

A lot of folks talk about how it's a period of suspension revolution--but I think the most important product improvements has been the tires-Kenda and Schwalbe very much at the front of this. The fact that they can produce compounds that are so dern soft and sticky yet reasonably strong etc-changed everything I expect from a tire--Most of my Buds are on nevegals--I've been using Schwalbe Alberts (2.25--soft 'front only' and a regular faster rear tire)-love 'em--those reinforced sidewalls are for real--anyway-it's a good time to experiment with new tires.

technique and local conditions are what it's really all about.I am so accustomed to how committed I can be cornering with the Panaracer FR 2.4 (front and rear) that going back to a Nevegal is too drastic of a change. What exactly it is that I am accustomed to, mounted on wide rims, square profile, big stiff knobs, stiff sidewalls. The 2.5 nevs are rounder profile, smaller softer knobs, suppler. All okay in certain situations but seriously lacking the level of commitment in the railingest of dirt.

I'm finally getting around to taking the BG's for a spin this weekend with a Nev on the rear.

1. Does anyone else here have experience with both the Kendas and Contis and can compare? I have heard great things so fat about the Verticals. Are they really that inferior?

2. I may be able to get a Bluegroove 2.35 front/rear, but can't find any Nevegal 2.35 . Any experience with the BG as a rear tire?

I run BG's front and rear, unless I am in deep, soft dirt. For most conditions in nor-cal they rule. I have tried the dh casings and the folding in 2.1,2.35,2.5,2.7. I like the 2.5 ft and 2.35 combo with most rides requiring the dh casings for me. They picked a perfect name for the tire as it rules on hard pack trails like A-line in Whistler. The folding kendas have super thin sidewalls and will pinch flat too easily unless running high pressure. Once you get em high enough to prevent pinching some of your traction is gone.

So that is why I am going to be trying out the big bettys and also the new weirwolf LT2.55 tire from wtb. They seem to have the right combo of pinch flat protection with good rubber compounds while still being fairly light weight compared to full DH tires.

I'm not sure I like the 2.1 Nev / 2.1 BG combo better than the Specialized Fast Trak Pro D2 2.0 they replaced. On firm, sandy, almost decomposed granite type surfaces, the tires just want to wash out. To be fair though, I need to put in some higher speed miles than just what I did this afternoon on a foot path. However, I felt that on Saturday's ride, the rear would spin too easy on the climb. I ony had 30 to 35 psi, so I was a bit puzzled. The Fast Trak Pro never did that at the same pressures. The downhill was more of a white knuckle ride (Los Pinos), so I wasn't doing any leaning into corners or anything. Do a search for "Los Pinos" on these boards, and you'll see pics and links to one of Winston's videos of it. It's just a nutty downhill. The tires did great though, and I'm glad I had them over the softer Fast Trak Pro's, but if I would have gone back down the way I went up, I think I would have rather had the Fast Trak Pro's.

1. Does anyone else here have experience with both the Kendas and Contis and can compare? I have heard great things so fat about the Verticals. Are they really that inferior?

2. I may be able to get a Bluegroove 2.35 front/rear, but can't find any Nevegal 2.35 . Any experience with the BG as a rear tire?

I rode a 2.5 BG on the front and a 2.35 Nev on the rear for slow, soft, and rocky north eastern trails last year and I thought they were great with the exception of my rear tire getting eaten by the rocks. I certainly prefer the stickyness of those tires compared to the Conti's. I rode Survival Pros a few years ago and really liked them until I found how much better sticky compounds were. Not bad tires and Conti's protection system does seem to help some with preventing sidewalls from getting torn apart. So this year I have ordered a Conti Slash Pro with their "new sticky tread mixture" I hope it truely is stickier than previous models.

As for DH I have been happy with Michelins but am tempted to try Kendas for my next set.